Reactions

oh my ! oh my ! where have the years gone . I remember seeing this album in the window of my fav music shop in the 60's . Its a HMV as I look at it in Australia it was RCA black label with Nipper ( Nipper gone to Dogs Heaven and sticking up for Elvis in Bone Alley ) . Ah yes where have the years gone . Good album , top shot of Elvis as the for comments on tech's would not have a clue just listen to the songs . oh my o my.

I have read somewhere (one Elvis site), that some crazy audiophiles insert CD into player, listen to just 5 songs and then get up, flip the CD (twice!!) and insert it again into player only to "feel" just like vinyl... Talk about crazy E fans... :D

Hi circleG. Agreed ! I'm almost sure the difference in sound will not be dramatic. I wonder how much cutted available surface per song they will use. I really wonder why they'll issue in this form !? Always El.

very interesting points, something I've been confused about lately. The trouble is there has to be quite a dramatic difference in sound to justify three songs per side. i once again refer to the Beatles latest vinyl issues which are basically as close as you'll ever get to the original thing, same amount of tracks per side and amazing sound quality.I would have preferred this Elvis album to have the track listing as per the Cd that was released in 1997, that would justify two discs or as a single disc with original track list. Maybe something for Ernst to think about ...

Pietro S, you're welcome ! Your reaction was normal, asking yourself why 3 songs each side, and 4 sides makes a total of 12 songs , just the total number of songs on the original LP. Here is Deano 1 's remark spot on ! With only 3 songs on each side the sound quality should be very good, at least I hope it will be !Always El.

Deano1, yes, you are absolutely right ! At first they tried to use it for music but due to low quality they soon switched to use it for recordings of talking only. You are also right about sound quality in this way that larger grooves allow more dynamic reproduction. The larger the groove the better the sound. That's why a lot of old 78rpm shellacs sound very good and clear ( except for the hiss, pops and clics of course, LOL) but purely musically speaking these old 'servants' had a great dynamic range. For a song of +/- 2' 30" they could press a lot of large grooves on the available surface area of the platter. Always El.

Benny, I have a record player with that speed too. From what I have been told it was for story records and not musical LPs...The reason for only having three songs per side may be because there are some audiophiles that feel less than ten minutes per side produces the best sound. It keeps the needle from skating as the groove gets smaller in circumference which produces a distorted sound.

For a short period the 16 2/3 rpm speed existed but the quality of the soundreproduction was not good enough. I still own a couple of Dual recordplayers with 16 2/3 , 33 1/3 , 45 and 78 rpm speed selector but never had or saw a 16 2/3 rpm record. Always El.